Talents, prerequisites, and thinking like a player

It has been quite some time since the event that inspired me to write this post occurred--almost two weeks, to be exact--but the issue I want to discuss doesn't derive its relevance from any recent development; it is a point that is, I think, worth discussing at any time. About two weeks ago, Ghostcrawler (WoW's lead systems designer) posted a comment in a forum topic about senseless prerequisites within talent trees (like when a PvP ability is a prerequisite for a class's core PvE ability; Dragon’s Breath being required for Living Bomb was given as an example). In response to players asking for their removal, Ghostcrawler had this to say:

This is the kind of feedback I categorize as thinking like a player not like a designer. As a player, removing prereqs in talent trees removes restrictions. Rather than having to make a hard choice, you can take what you want. Under that logic, it makes sense to you for the developer to remove the prereqs. But you could make a similar argument about the talent tree tiers as a whole. If I didn't have to spend those 5 talent points in tier 2, then I could get that extra talent point somewhere else! Wouldn't that give me as a player more freedom, and doesn't more freedom always lead to a better game?

I can see where his thinking is coming from, and like many of Ghostcrawler's posts, I can sympathize with the point he is trying to make, but I think he missed one key point in this discussion: what about the developers thinking like players? Because from the other comments he made in the thread, it doesn't seem like there's a lot of that going on.

Ghostcrawler's main point seemed to be that the reason these seemingly senseless prerequisites exist is to force the player to make actual choices about whether it's worth it to take those less useful talents in order to take the more useful ones. This I can understand, but I find his method misguided for several reasons. For one thing, when the prerequisites are for talents that players need to take, because those talents are part of their main DPS arsenal (the original post lists many examples), it really isn't a matter of choice. When players are forced to take talents they'll never use in order to get their necessary talents, all the designers are doing is inconveniencing those classes. Now, this can be justified by the idea that it's up to the players to find creative ways to take advantage of these situational talents, but there are some cases where that just isn't possible. When will a frost death knight DPSing in a raid use Hungering Cold? And won't an arms warrior who's DPSing in a raid lose damage if he going out of range to charge?

And here's the thing: yes, these paths force us to make choices about how we spend our talents points, as Ghostcrawler himself said.

A lot of the game is about making choices. If the choice is hard, that means both options are compelling. If the choice is easy then the game has less depth because instead of picking left vs. right you are picking right vs. wrong.

I completely agree with him on this, but being forced to choose between taking a lack-luster talent in order to take a good one and not taking either isn't a compelling choice if no player in their right mind would take the second option. When that's the case, the developers only succeed in making the player resent the game for reducing his choice by forcing him to spend extra talent points that could be spent elsewhere.

I can think of another reason Blizzard might want these abilities to be behind less useful talents, but that one doesn't hold up, either, even from a developer's standpoint. That reason is that, perhaps those abilities are behind prerequisites because they give the player too much power after spending only one talent point. Maybe the developers are just trying to increase the cost of the more useful abilities without flat-out increasing the number of talent points it takes to unlock them. If that's the case, there are other alternatives to putting them behind barely useful/useless prerequisites that only make the player resent receiving a useless talent when he reaches his odd level. They could always nerf the talent so it isn't as important of a part of the player's rotation, thus making it feasible the talent would be worth just one talent point. The other option, though, is a much better one when you think like a player: make the other talents in the tree more appealing.

To go with the old saying about trying to keep kids on the farm when they've seen the city, don't make it harder to get to the city; instead, improve the farm. Do you want players to actually consider whether or not they should take the talents you want them to put thought into taking? Then give them some viable alternatives. This is especially important in an era when we are only getting a talent point every two levels, so each talent needs to feel significant. If they really want the choice to be difficult, the solution is to improve the less attractive options, not to make the more attractive options more difficult to get. As players, this would be a much better alternative than direction Blizzard seems to be taking now. I know I'd rather antagonize between two excellent choices than two mediocre ones, and this would still create the same kind of difficult choice between two compelling options that Ghostcrawler is so focused on.

What really irks me is that it seems like Ghostcrawler, and possibly Blizzard in general, hasn't considered this option. This possibility shines through especially in this response by GC:

Let's take your argument to the next level. What if there is nothing in the first tier that appeals to me? Why can I just skip over tier 1 and spend points in tier 2 directly? For that matter, why do I have to spend down a talent tree at all. If I would use both Earthquake and Feral Spirit, shouldn't I be able to get both of those? Is it a better game that I am denied that option?

While I agree with him about his larger point, that talent tree mechanics exist the way they do now to prevent players from cherry-picking talents, I can't agree with where he's coming from about skipping the first tier of talents if nothing there appeals to you. I can't agree with him, because in that case, the problem isn't a player trying to maximize his potential power within the system; the problem is the system itself. If there is really nothing within the first tier that appeals to players, but Blizzard still plans on making players spend talent points in that first tier, how can they call that talent tree successfully designed? See, though the current talent tree system exists as it does so player can't cherry pick talents, that doesn't mean that players are supposed to feel as if they would like to cherry pick talents. The fact that players can feel the restraint of those restrictions shows that the talents in the tree just aren't that appealing, which is the fault of the designers, not the players. In an ideal world (of warcraft), players wouldn't notice those restrictions because the talents would be so awesome that players would wish for more talent points to spend. The fact that players can feel those restraints shows that the choices just aren't as appealing as they should be, and when those choices aren't appealing, the talent tree is just not well-designed.

All of the conclusions I came to in this post would be abundantly clear to Ghostcrawler and team if they would try thinking like players. We players are fine with making difficult decisions when it comes to our talents if both options are viable and both are appealing. If Blizzard can make that happen, then there will probably be less complaining about the talent trees. Sure, players will probably just complain about how the talent trees are too good and they need more talent points or fewer talents, but at least it would be easier for Blizzard to defend their design against that kind of criticism. After all, it's easier to defend there being too much of a good thing than there not being enough.